Grumble about too strict an attitude about backward compatibility...

[laotseu]

Skip Montanaro wrote:
> I don't want to wake any sleeping dogs, however, as I'm sitting here
> watching a bunch of Fortran function names fly by as SciPy builds, I'm
> reminded of the fairly recent threads about backward compatibility,
> Python-in-a-tie, etc.   Here I am compiling with a Fortran 90/95 compiler
> (Sun's Forte thing-a-ma-bob) and see function names like
> 
>         lpni:
>         klvna:
>         chgubi:
>         cyzo:
>         klvnb:
>         rmn2so:
>         csphik:
> 
> spew forth.  So, while it's great that this same large library compiles and
> runs on compilers back to at least Fortran 77 (and probably earlier),
> programmers are still stuck with the same cryptic function and data names
> they had to deal with 30+ years ago, all in the name of backward
> compatibility.
> 
> What's the Python connection?  Other than a reminder not to get to slavish
> about backward compatibility, I note that these same function names will
> then go on to pollute the Python namespace because all this Fortran code is
> automatically wrapped using f2py.
> 

Well, that may be true, but the chances of a name collision are pretty 
low IMHO...

 >         lpni:
 >         klvna:
 >         chgubi:
 >         cyzo:
 >         klvnb:
 >         rmn2so:
 >         csphik:

What an alien language ! And, er, what where the functions names before 
the crash ?-)

laotseu